论文部分内容阅读
桥梁采用扩大基础或沉井基础,按以往情况来说,一般沉井基础总是要比扩大基础深些,或遇到扩大基础不能解决涌水或流沙等防护措施上有困难时,而采用沉井基础。如没有这些问题,在扩大基础和沉井基础同样可以考虑的条件下,应抓住哪些环节,作为采用扩大基础,或沉井基础的依据T是值得商榷的问题。此问题的提出,是由于在某复线桥梁工程中墩台基础差不多都采用了深浅不同的沉井基础,有的认为合适,有的认为不合适。现将笔者的想法,阐述于下,望不吝指正。现将跨度10米的钢筋混凝土梁和T型桥台,尖端形桥墩的扩大基础,以及沉井基础的工程数量列如表1。并按1961年铁道部基价表所列单价,另加22%间接费,在均不考虑防水情况下,估计工料价如表2。
According to the past circumstances, the general caisson foundation is always deeper than the foundation for expansion, or it is difficult to meet the protective measures such as expanding water or quicksand to expand the foundation, and the use of caisson basis. Without these problems, it is questionable which aspects should be seized under the same conditions that can be considered for expansion of foundations and caisson foundations, as a basis for the expansion of foundations or caisson bases. This problem is raised because almost all of the piers and abutments in a double-track bridge project have adopted caisson foundation with different shades, and some think it appropriate and others think it inappropriate. Now the author’s idea, described in the next, hope not correct me. Now the span of 10 meters of reinforced concrete beam and T-type abutment, the pier-shaped piers to expand the foundation, as well as the number of caisson based projects listed in Table 1. And according to 1961 Ministry of Railways price list listed in the unit price, plus 22% indirect costs, regardless of waterproofing, estimated feed prices in Table 2.